Home › CLAT PG › law › constitutional_law_advanced › Article 226 (writ jurisdiction of High Courts) d…
Article 226 (writ jurisdiction of High Courts) differs from Article 32 (Supreme Court) PRIMARILY in that
AArticle 226 writs lie ONLY for enforcement of Fundamental Rights, but Article 32 writs are wider
BArticle 226 writs lie for enforcement of Fundamental Rights AND for 'any other purpose' (i.e., any legal right), while Article 32 is confined to Fundamental Rights
CArticle 32 writs lie before any forum
DBoth are identical in scope
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: B. Article 226 writs lie for enforcement of Fundamental Rights AND for 'any other purpose' (i.e., any legal right), while Article 32 is confined to Fundamental Rights
Article 226's 'any other purpose' clause gives High Courts a broader writ jurisdiction than the Supreme Court under Article 32. However, Article 32 is itself a Fundamental Right — a structural advantage Article 226 lacks.
Related questions
Under the doctrine of 'pith and substance', if a law enacted by one legislature INCIDENTALArticle 311(2) provides that a civil servant cannot be dismissed, removed or reduced in raIn M C Mehta v Union of India (1986), the Supreme Court evolved the principle of 'absoluteUnder Article 13(2), any law made by the State 'in contravention' of the Fundamental RightS R Bommai v Union of India (1994) significantly curtailedWhich decision laid down that Article 21's 'procedure established by law' must be just, fa'Prospective overruling' as a constitutional technique was introduced in India inDoctrine of 'colourable legislation' is BEST captured by the maxim